Dr Adnan Ibrahim on Emotional Atheism

[FearGod]

I'm still not sure what point he was trying to make with all that "give it a name" stuff.

It's about dishonesty, giving it a name to exclude God and religion without offering yet any scientific explanation,
one example abiogenesis as a replacement to genesis.

 

[LuisDantas]

Oh, I get that, Luis while at the same time agree that it's a very flimsy foundation for an argument. You would think that such an intelligent man would do much better.

I did! It took @FearGod to teach me better.

 

[Godobeyer]

But, Godobeyer, the highlighted part is something you simply do not know for a fact. THAT is the point.
What you are saying is an assertion!


as·ser·tion
əˈsərSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: assertion; plural noun: assertions
a confident and forceful statement of fact or belief.
"his assertion that his father had deserted the family"
synonyms: declaration, contention, statement, claim, opinion, proclamation, announcement, pronouncement, protestation, avowal; More

formal averment;
rare asseveration

"I questioned his assertion"
the action of stating something or exercising authority confidently and forcefully.
"the assertion of his legal rights"
synonyms: defense of, upholding of; insistence on
"an assertion of the right to march"

Not assertion , its an explanation that its foolish and blind vision to believe that "randomness,accident, natural selection " had power and intelligence to creat any thing by long long period of time

 

[YmirGF]

It's about dishonesty, giving it a name to exclude God and religion without offering yet any scientific explanation,
one example abiogenesis as a replacement to genesis.

So, are you meaning that science should take god and religion into consideration in their investigations of the natural world? Seriously?

 

[LuisDantas]

It's about dishonesty, giving it a name to exclude God and religion without offering yet any scientific explanation,
one example abiogenesis as a replacement to genesis.

If that is the worry, then there is no problem whatsoever.

 

[LuisDantas]

Not assertion , its an explanation that its foolish and blind vision to believe that "randomness,accident, natural selection " had power and intelligence to creat any thing by long long period of time

That is categorically an assertion, and an unreasonable one at that.

You are expecting people to feel bound to your expectations for no good reason.

 

[Godobeyer]

That is categorically an assertion, and an unreasonable one at that.

You are expecting people to feel bound to your expectations for no good reason.

Facts i am rejecting yours, you proof me that empty/nothing had intelligence and power to created.

 

[FearGod]

So, are you meaning that science should take god and religion into consideration in their investigations of the natural world? Seriously?

Origin of life and the universe.
Do we have a scientific answer for it?

Nothingness, that's how it should be as a start, no matter, no space and nothing at all.
Could you please explain it by science?

 

[LuisDantas]

Facts i am rejecting yours, you proof me that empty/nothing had intelligence and power to created.

If you want to presume a Creator God, then there is no way to prove otherwise. Such an entity can always be presumed, no matter how much one learns and explains.

That does not mean that it should be presumed, however, nor that it fullfils any useful role.

On the other hand, it is really weird and disrespectful to expect others to share of such a belief.

Yet that sure seems to be what you Muslims expect. That we, who do not tell you what you should believe in, should justify ourselves towards you, who perhaps arrogantly expect people to have reasons not to believe in God.

I am deeply sorry, but there is no way not to conclude that you are seriously in the wrong in so doing.

 

[Godobeyer]

If you want to presume a Creator God, then there is no way to prove otherwise. Such an entity can always be presumed, no matter how much one learns and explains.

That does not mean that it should be presumed, however, nor that it fullfils any useful role.

On the other hand, it is really weird and disrespectful to expect others to share of such a belief.

Yet that sure seems to be what you Muslims expect. That we, who do not tell you what you should believe in, should justify ourselves towards you, who perhaps arrogantly expect people to have reasons not to believe in God.

I am deeply sorry, but there is no way not to conclude that you are seriously in the wrong in so doing.

I do believe it's better to believe in a Creator , than believe in "nothing" created me .
it's same to me that someone says cars or planes are made by it self, not by humans.

I feel my English level fails me to explain my opinion ,I hope @Debater Slayer translate this for you :
انا سميت العشوائية و الاختيار الطبعي و الصدفة : ب العدم

انا اعقتد ان بداية الخلق مستحيل تكون من العدم لأن العدم ليس لديها الذكاء لتركيب و إيجاد حياة


الخلية الواحدة ليس لديها إمكانية لتعيش ...ناهيك عن تشكيل عضو او كائن منسق و مركب من أعضاء مختلفة بشكل مذهل

 

[LuisDantas]

I do believe it's better to believe in a Creator , than believe in "nothing" created me .

I disagree, but that is your decision to make.

it's same to me that someone says cars or planes are made by it self, not by humans.

That is been addressed all the way back in the video that @9-10ths_Penguin offered us.

You may well feel that way, but there is no logical reason why you must be correct. In fact, I doubt you are.

I feel my English level fails me to explain my opinion ,I hope @Debater Slayer translate this for you :
انا سميت العشوائية و الاختيار الطبعي و الصدفة : ب العدم

انا اعقتد ان بداية الخلق مستحيل تكون من العدم لأن العدم ليس لديها الذكاء لتركيب و إيجاد حياة


الخلية الواحدة ليس لديها إمكانية لتعيش ...ناهيك عن تشكيل عضو او كائن منسق و مركب من أعضاء مختلفة بشكل مذهل

Let's wait.

Running this through Google Translate, it seems to roughly correspond to:

"I say that random natural selection and luck of the draw are not true explanations. They are empty of meaning and purpose, and therefore can't be the true causes of speciation.

The universe can't just have happened to exist out of nowhere, because an universe so chaotically originated could not possibly sustain nor originate life.

Life can't be originated accidentally out of single-cell beings, since they would not have the means to survive. And that is before considering how impossible it would be for such beings to somehow originate more complex life without a guiding intelligence making it so."

None of that amounts to more than an appeal to your aesthetical sense. Nearly all of that has been refuted quite decisively for a long time, or is simply mistaken.

But it is conceivable that there is some subtlety there escaping my perception.

 

[Godobeyer]

I disagree, but that is your decision to make.

Of course , everyone is free.

That is been addressed all the way back in the video that @9-10ths_Penguin offered us.

That video is full of non sense and blah blah.

You may well feel that way, but there is no logical reason why you must be correct. In fact, I doubt you are.

Indeed there is infinity logical reasons , you were almost nothing "sprem" and egg" and you become perfect body.
If you tell me accident or randomness I will kill you

Let's wait.

I hope too.

 

[LuisDantas]

Of course , everyone is free.

And I intend to remain so.

That video is full of non sense and blah blah.

On the contrary. It is a marvel of logical argumentation, quite unlike Adnan's videos.

Indeed there is infinity logical reasons , you were almost nothing "sprem" and egg" and you become perfect body.
If you tell me accident or randomness I will kill you

Apparently you are not alone in that unreasonable stance. It is no wonder that Islam's public image is hurting so bad.

I hope too.

I made an attempt at translating it with some extrapolation from Google Translate. Please check the previous post again.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's about dishonesty, giving it a name to exclude God and religion without offering yet any scientific explanation,
one example abiogenesis as a replacement to genesis.

I think it's Dr. Ibrahim who's being dishonest, then. The term "abiogenesis" doesn't exclude God. The term certainly isn't intended to exclude God.

 

[Godobeyer]

Running this through Google Translate, it seems to roughly correspond to:

"I say that random natural selection and luck of the draw are not true explanations. They are empty of meaning and purpose, and therefore can't be the true causes of speciation.

The universe can't just have happened to exist out of nowhere, because an universe so chaotically originated could not possibly sustain nor originate life.

Life can't be originated accidentally out of single-cell beings, since they would not have the means to survive. And that is before considering how impossible it would be for such beings to somehow originate more complex life without a guiding intelligence making it so."

None of that amounts to more than an appeal to your aesthetical sense. Nearly all of that has been refuted quite decisively for a long time, or is simply mistaken.

But it is conceivable that there is some subtlety there escaping my perception.

No, google Translator did not translate well , just wait DS translation please

 

[Godobeyer]

On the contrary. It is a marvel of logical argumentation, quite unlike Adnan's videos.

lol , seems we share some opinion but in different videos

Apparently you are not alone in that unreasonable stance. It is no wonder that Islam's public image is hurting so bad.

It's not about Islam.
it's about golden rule , every design had designer.

 

[LuisDantas]

lol , seems we share some opinion but in different videos

Apparently.

It's not about Islam.

The evidence sure suggests that it is indeed about Islam.

it's about golden rule , every design had designer.

"Golden Rule" is a designation usually reserved to describe the ethical principle of reciprocity, just as a comment.

Of course everything that is designed had a designer. But it is anything but clear that existence, life or the universe were designed.

 

[Godobeyer]

The evidence sure suggests that it is indeed about Islam.

I meant it's not ONLY "Islam" religion which claim that.

"Golden Rule" is a designation usually reserved to describe the ethical principle of reciprocity, just as a comment.

sorry ,I don't understand this one

Of course everything that is designed had a designer. But it is anything but clear that existence, life or the universe were designed.

Now , tell me for your opinion who had intellegence to design you and all this life ?

 

[LuisDantas]

I meant it's not ONLY "Islam" religion which claim that.

True enough. But not a justification, not by any means.

sorry ,I don't understand this one

It is not anything about your point. I was just saying that there is an unrelated principle that is better known by that name of "Golden Rule". That one is about ethics, while yours is about design and causes.

Now , tell me for your opinion who had intellegence to design you and all this life ?

No one. Your premise is faulty.

 

[FearGod]

I think it's Dr. Ibrahim who's being dishonest, then. The term "abiogenesis" doesn't exclude God. The term certainly isn't intended to exclude God.

Are you sure?

The origin of life is a key point of distinction between and between the Creationist and Darwinist schools of thought. Creationists believe that God created all forms of life on earth (including humans), endowing non-living matter with life through a deliberate, supernatural act. In constast, naturalists typically believe that life descended from a single self-replicating protocell which in turn came into existence through spontaneous chemical reactions. This atheistic theory for the origin of life is commonly known as abiogenesis.
http://nwcreation.net/abiogenesis.html